Boy Scouts’ gay ban jeopardizes tax breaks

SACRAMENTO  California lawmakers may strip the Boy Scouts of state tax breaks if the organization continues to ban gays from joining its ranks or serving as adult leaders.

“The Boy Scouts provide a valuable service and they build model citizens in communities. Yet, it discriminates against some of our most vulnerable youth,” said Sen. Ricardo Lara, an openly gay Bell Gardens Democrat pushing legislation to yank the tax exemptions.

But Lara’s bill is not being welcomed in all quarters, even among some gays who were once Scouts.

“I don’t want to see the Boy Scouts have their tax exemptions taken away,” said Jeremy Zaida, a gay freshman at San Diego State University who achieved Eagle Scout status, the organization’s highest honor.

“It’s an organization that overwhelmingly does great things for the community, young boys and their parents. Taking away this tax break would impede their ability to do all of those good things.”

Lara’s measure, while clearly targeting the Boy Scouts, would cover all organizations that ban people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT). Those groups would lose their nonprofit, tax-exempt status on goods they sell and would have to pay corporate income taxes. It will not affect the status of any sponsoring organizations, such as churches.

A Boy Scouts of America spokesman declined to comment on the California bill.

Karen England, executive director of the conservative Capitol Resource Institute in Sacramento, said the measure itself discriminates against those who believe the Scouts and other private groups should be free to set their own standards.

In an emailed alert to her members, England said various nonprofit organizations that “have been operating for the good of our youth will be forced to abandon their deeply held religious views or close their doors.”

Lara’s legislation faces considerable challenges. For one, the measure requires a two-thirds vote because it changes tax law. While Democrats hold commanding majorities in both house, there are no assurances that they will vote as a bloc on an issue as controversial as this one.

Still, Lara says he is confident that the bill will gain sufficient votes, even among Republicans.

“Nobody here wants to support an organization that discriminates, especially against our youth,” Lara said.

But count out Republican Assemblywoman Marie Waldron of Escondido.

“The first concerns that arise are about the First Amendment — individuals’ ability to have their religious views unabridged. I don’t know if government should have a role in controlling speech or association,” Waldron said. Former scouts, who later came out as gay, are conflicted.

Zaida, the San Diego student, is worried that the measure “will just provide more ammunition” to groups critical of the gay-rights movement.

“It’s inflammatory to say the least,” he said.

Miles Nevin, a former Scout whose father was a Scoutmaster and brother an Eagle Scout, supports the bill because it could help push the Scouts to open its programs to all.

“I believe so much in the organization, but I am upset by the policy,” said Nevin, the executive director of the California State Student Association based in Long Beach.

Reflecting on his years as a Scout, Nevin, who is gay, said: “It was a highlight of our lives. I want it to be the case for everyone else. The benefit is profound.”

The Boy Scouts of America, already rocked by revelations of secret files and charges it covered up sexual abuse by volunteer leaders for decades, has found itself on the defensive even as it held firm to its no-gays policy as recently as last year.

But protests have escalated. One reason: a San Francisco Bay Area scout was denied an Eagle Scout award, its highest honor. Ryan Andresen later left the organization.

“What’s important for them to understand is there are additional consequences in states like California that don’t support discrimination,” Eric Andresen, the scout’s father, said in an interview about why he supports the bill. “They have the legal right (to bar gays), but they no longer have a socially acceptable right to discriminate. Society has grown up.”

By February, with some high-profile corporate sponsors pulling out over the policy, but with sponsoring churches just as adamant about keeping the exclusions, the Scouts had decided to once again review its policy.

But an all-volunteer executive board deadlocked, putting a final decision before the National Council when it convenes in May. There are indications that the 1,400 representatives will face three choices: retain the ban, abandon it, or allow local councils to independently set their own policy.

Lara said he will consider reworking the bill depending on the outcome of that vote. If regional councils are free to set the policy, then his bill would likely affect only those that maintain the anti-gay stance, he said.

A hearing date on Senate Bill 323 has not been set.

The measure has emerged as another front in the gay rights movement, which has achieved a number of recent milestones, from a repeal of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy to election year victories for same-sex marriages in several states. California has a ban on same-sex marriage — a voter-approved law that is now before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Those who back the scout’s policy also have victories in hand. Most notably, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision in 2000, upheld the exclusionary policy. The court majority said the Scouts, which also bars atheists and agnostics, enjoy a constitutionally protected right as a private organization to determine who can participate.

More recently, the Scouts secured another win in a case out of San Diego. A federal appellate court ruled in December that the Scouts could continue to lease land owned by the city of San Diego in Balboa Park and Mission Bay. A lawsuit contended that the lease was unconstitutional because it violates a state ban on giving aid or preference to religious groups. A Scout oath references God and members must be “faithful in his religious duties.”